of the Greek Tongue. 235 



to Xeyovf, a, the sign of the feminine gender, as borrowed from 

 the article in the Doric dialect, we have Xeyovr-a, or changing 

 V into a, "Kzyodaa., and contracting Xzyouaa. 



From the view which we have just taken of the inflections of 

 nouns, it is obvious that three things are to be attended to in 

 the analysis: 1. The radix. 2. The characteristic of the 

 case. 3. The characteristic of the number, as these will syn- 

 thetically again recompound the word. And here we would 

 observe, that i, whether subscribed as an actual constituent of 

 the word, is always the characteristic of the dative, while v or 

 its substitute a, is that of the accusative. 



We would also remark, that i subscribed is not confined to 

 datives of the first and second declension, but is also found in 

 some of the contracted forms of the third declension, as in yL^pa. ; 

 for here the root being xe^a, by postfixing t gives xe/jat, which, 

 by subscribing j, becomes xf/)$K, or inserting t, xe/;a-T-i. 



With respect to the verbs, I feel that few observations will 

 suffice, inasmuch as the attention of the analysts of language 

 having been very generally directed to this part of the Greek 

 tongue, its analysis has been pretty fully completed. I would 

 observe, that it is time now for grammarians to lay aside 

 many of their rules for the formation of tenses, as being 

 grounded solely on a mechanical addition, subtraction, or in- 

 terchange of letters — for example, what can be more absurd 

 than to derive the first indefinite passive from the third person 

 of the perfect passive, by changing rai into ^tjv, thus connect- 

 ing the third person of one tense with the first person of ano- 

 ther ? Even where the connection between the tenses is appa- 

 rently more natural, as in the first future, and first indefinite, 

 which seem to partake of the same characteristics, it is well to 

 'consider whether they are or can be at all allied in force, and 

 consequently, whether the similarity of their characteristics 

 may not have arisen out of different circumstances in each, 

 independent one of another ; thus the proper characteristic of 

 the first future is r, disguised, however, sometimes in -^ or ?, 

 and on account of euphony, necessarily rejected from roots 

 terminating in the liquids, X, pt, v, p. Now, this characteristic 

 s is taken from £s^, signifying tOy and thus denoting something 

 future, which er, indeed, was itself formerly found in all futures 



